"Muzzle!" and "Finger" safety warnings

[Ray_Z]

A ROs first responsibility is to safety. If he/she can stop a dangerous situation before it happens, they should. I've read about concerns about the possibility of a personality conflict. If you feel that this is a case that's what MDs are for. If it bothers you that the RO warns you and that it breaks your concentration, maybe you should be more aware of what you are doing in a COF. Safety is first and foremost (period).

[Sarge]

I voted "distracting". Also, if the shooter has a bad relationship with the RO for that stage (for some reasons that are not worthy of mention), the RO could abuse his discretion by issuing a lot of muzzle and finger warnings again and again like what happened to me at a local match last month. At a stage where the RO in charge was a previous friend(but not anymore before that match), the stage was set up so that the shooter would have to reload while moving uprange and stop at a window to shoot 3 paper targets one which you have to shoot at approx. 170 degrees. I'm right handed. And while reloading and moving towards the window to my right/rear the RO was shouting "MUZZLE!" about 3 to 4 times. Muzzle was pointed downrange and angle was less than the angle I would have while shooting at the paper targets at which point he stopped issuing warnings. I was distracted so many times with so many warnings of finger and muzzle but no DQ. I did not complain because it was his discretion to issue such warnings. But I would rather be DQ'ed and be done with it.

At a local match I would have taken about 5 seconds of that crap. I would be sure of the facts and would stop, unload and show clear. Have him run me through ICHDH and went to the head honcho and got re squadded or something. There is no place for petty BS on an active range let alone a match. The RO was CREATING a safety issue in my opinion. At a larger match I would have made the problem known to the MD and made sure it would not happen.

[Gary Stevens]

I give very few warnings, but that is because I find that most of the time I don't have to. The skill level of our shooters is beyond belief almost all of the time. However, I am watching for an action. I don't care who the shooter is, or what their skill level is, everyone alive today makes mistakes at some point.

If it is in that area of becoming unsafe I'll give the warning. If they are unsafe I'll give the DQ. Other than that, I keep my mouth shut.

[Charles Bond]

I give very few warnings, but that is because I find that most of the time I don't have to. The skill level of our shooters is beyond belief almost all of the time. However, I am watching for an action. I don't care who the shooter is, or what their skill level is, everyone alive today makes mistakes at some point.

If it is in that area of becoming unsafe I'll give the warning. If they are unsafe I'll give the DQ. Other than that, I keep my mouth shut.

And in my opinion this is exactly what shooters want. I have experenced a couple of ROs who I would see yell warnings about 70 degrees which clearly distracted the shooter.

[ajg308]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

I give very few warnings, but that is because I find that most of the time I don't have to. The skill level of our shooters is beyond belief almost all of the time. However, I am watching for an action. I don't care who the shooter is, or what their skill level is, everyone alive today makes mistakes at some point.

If it is in that area of becoming unsafe I'll give the warning. If they are unsafe I'll give the DQ. Other than that, I keep my mouth shut.

[kgunz11]

I think for "finger" warnings they should only be given if the competitor does not clearly have their finger where it can be seen. It's kind of like saying "hey, I can't see your finger, could you make it visible please". I'd much rather have someone ask me to make it obvious than send me packing just because they couldn't see it. I'm all for being disqualified IF I break a rule, but not for being disqualified if you think I might be breaking a rule. The "muzzle" warning can be given to a disoriented shooter clearing a malfunction just as a friendly reminder not to forget where you are, no matter your skill level. I'd much rather someone remind me if my attention is gone to the gun, but I know it is at the discretion of the RO. They have the choice of yelling "muzzle" or "stop". It's not the responsibility of the RO to maintain my muzzle, that falls on me, but a courtesy warning to insure safety would be nice. A finger obviously in the trigger guard is a disqualification and no warning should be given there, the warning is more of a notification to the shooter that the RO cannot see it. I have highlighted some areas below in the RO Creed which outline being courteous and the primary goal of the RO to be safety of the range, all participants, and all spectators, which in my mind allows the RO to issue a warning as preventative maintenance in an effort to complete that task. I also believe one should be very careful in executing such warnings, and there is an appropriate time for such a warning. Some are of the opinion that it's the job of the shooter to maintain that safety, I think it's a dual effort between the RO and the shooter. That's just my opinion, and many may disagree with that.

As a USPSA Range Officer, I shall conduct all competitions with the safety of the competitors, spectators and fellow Range Officials first and foremost in my thoughts and actions.

I shall always be courteous while maintaining firm control over my range and areas of responsibility.

I will always strive to be totally fair and impartial in my judgments.

Safety shall always be my primary goal, with efficiency and speed of the competition as secondary factors.

It is a privilege and an honor to serve as a Range Officer and I shall act accordingly.

It is my duty to assist all competitors in their attempts to accomplish their goals and not to hinder them by undue harassment and authoritarian behavior.

I shall put aside personal prejudices and act as an impartial judge at all times.

I shall keep my opinions to myself and shall not be critical of any individual beyond the field of contest.

I will thoroughly familiarize myself with all current regulations, match rules and attendant subjects.

I will be firm and fair in all judgmental calls made during the course of a stage, and be prepared to state in a clear and concise manner my reasons for such calls to the particular competitor or any Range Official.

During the course of a stage, my attention shall be clearly focused on the particular competitor I am assigned to observe, and I shall not permit my attention to be misdirected or lax.

Prior to and during a stage, I shall never consume any alcoholic beverage or narcotic. I understand that if I violate this rule, I may be suspended or barred from serving as a Range Official in the future.

I shall confer only with my fellow Range Officers and Match Officials concerning the behavior of any competitor and any decisions to be rendered.

I shall exercise due consideration for the personal emotions of any competitor, and shall act in a manner so as not to embarrass or disturb the competitor any more than is absolutely necessary.

I shall strive to never give even the appearance of wrongdoing.

[ChuckS]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

In a sport where time is measured in 1/100 seconds, any distraction is unwelcome.

[larry cazes]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

In a sport where time is measured in 1/100 seconds, any distraction is unwelcome.

Gotta agree with ChuckS. Especially pertinent if the distraction serves ZERO purpose. Once again, Either a rule was broken or it wasn't. If it was broken, make the ruling. If it wasn't why say anything? This has been debated to death here.

[kgunz11]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

In a sport where time is measured in 1/100 seconds, any distraction is unwelcome.

Gotta agree with ChuckS. Especially pertinent if the distraction serves ZERO purpose. Once again, Either a rule was broken or it wasn't. If it was broken, make the ruling. If it wasn't why say anything? This has been debated to death here.

Maybe to prevent someone from breaking a rule like sweeping the audience?

[VegasOPM]

I double muff (hybricomp), and I can't really distinguish what the RO is saying- so any comment causes me to pause and look around. I'm an advanced enough shooter that I am pretty well aware of my muzzle and finger. If I cross the 180 or move with my finger clearly in the trigger guard- DQ me, but don't interfere with my run. That being said, I will say "muzzle" and "finger" to new shooters at our local Level I match. That is part of our TIRO for new shooters. After the shooters have been at a few matches and have proven themselves to be safe, I'll ask if they want to hear "muzzle" or "finger" if they get close- or should I leave them alone unless they are DQ'ed (prior to the Make Ready command).

[larry cazes]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

In a sport where time is measured in 1/100 seconds, any distraction is unwelcome.

Gotta agree with ChuckS. Especially pertinent if the distraction serves ZERO purpose. Once again, Either a rule was broken or it wasn't. If it was broken, make the ruling. If it wasn't why say anything? This has been debated to death here.

Maybe to prevent someone from breaking a rule like sweeping the audience?

Not likely. You can't possibly know that is gonna happen before it does. Most locals and every area match I have shot in the last 8 years have targets that could be considered close to breaking 180 when engaged so we all play very close to the edge. What standard do you use for determining what is close enough to call out? What standard do you use for calling out "finger" ? It is either out of the trigger guard when the rules say it needs to be or it's a DQ, period. I don't presume to know the mind of the competitor when I am RO'ing, I am just tasked with enforcing the rules.....That is a very slippery slope. Sorry I don't buy it

[ShaunH]

I think the new / less skilled shooters need the RO warnings and the consultation after the stage so they can learn and stay safe.

I totally agree. I think we all want new shooters to have a good time and be safe so that they come back. More experienced shooters should know better and only get a "stop".

A couple years ago, I did have a new shooter give me a dirty look when I said muzzle to him. He DQ'd later that day (180). Haven't seen him since.

I was thanked last Saturday for calling muzzle.

Edited September 30, 2009 by ShaunH

[kgunz11]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

In a sport where time is measured in 1/100 seconds, any distraction is unwelcome.

Gotta agree with ChuckS. Especially pertinent if the distraction serves ZERO purpose. Once again, Either a rule was broken or it wasn't. If it was broken, make the ruling. If it wasn't why say anything? This has been debated to death here.

Maybe to prevent someone from breaking a rule like sweeping the audience?

Not likely. You can't possibly know that is gonna happen before it does. Most locals and every area match I have shot in the last 8 years have targets that could be considered close to breaking 180 when engaged so we all play very close to the edge. What standard do you use for determining what is close enough to call out? What standard do you use for calling out "finger" ? It is either out of the trigger guard when the rules say it needs to be or it's a DQ, period. I don't presume to know the mind of the competitor when I am RO'ing, I am just tasked with enforcing the rules.....That is a very slippery slope. Sorry I don't buy it

As I stated in the example in one of my previous posts, when a competitor might be clearing a jam. If they are disoriented or they are way involved in clearing the malfunction, a courtesy "don't forget about the 180" by giving a "muzzle" warning might be in order if they are getting close. I'm not talking about warning someone as they are swinging towards the 180 during a CoF, I'm talking about a special circumstance.

As for the "finger" warning, as I also stated, when you have someone that has that curling finger reload or movement that you can't tell if it is in or not, do you "STOP!" them or do you let them go? I'd rather you yell finger at me if you can't see mine clearly vs. think it's in the trigger guard and DQ me. I don't want to get DQ'd because someone thought my finger was in the trigger guard just because they couldn't see it wasn't.

So, in saying that, I'd appreciate any warning someone would be willing to give me. I'd rather have a bobble of a few tenths than someone send me home because they thought my finger was somewhere. I've heard a story about a guy at a prominent match that got DQ'd because of the finger, and he didn't even have that finger. It was missing at the digit, but the RO was certain he saw it in the TG. The shooter was reinstated in the match.

Either way, it's up to the RO as to rather or not they will give a warning. I don't advocate breaking the rules, new shooter or not. If they break the rule it's a DQ and the rules should be applied evenly to everyone. I guess we are all entitled to how we think things should happen, some folks want to warn, some don't. Some want to be warned, some don't. I'm not going to get all butt hurt about someone trying to help me with a warning. I wish the rule book would make things clear so this horse can be laid to rest.

[ajg308]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

In a sport where time is measured in 1/100 seconds, any distraction is unwelcome.

Gotta agree with ChuckS. Especially pertinent if the distraction serves ZERO purpose. Once again, Either a rule was broken or it wasn't. If it was broken, make the ruling. If it wasn't why say anything? This has been debated to death here.

Maybe to prevent someone from breaking a rule like sweeping the audience?

Yup. When I hold the timer I don't care who you are, if you get close you get the warning. Most of us never get close, so no big deal. Just because it distracts you means nothing to me. If you want to run the razors edge, fine, but deal with the consequences.

I got to shoot the whole 2009 Area 1 match with Dave Sevigny and RO'ed him on at least half the stages. Not once did he even get close to getting any kind of warning and he won the match easily. I know some stages make us run close to the 180, but a good RO has to bo concious of such things. Every stage is different, so is every shooter.

[Nik Habicht]

Bingo! If you are "distracted" by a word or two maybe golf should be your game, they really keep quiet in that sport!

In a sport where time is measured in 1/100 seconds, any distraction is unwelcome.

Gotta agree with ChuckS. Especially pertinent if the distraction serves ZERO purpose. Once again, Either a rule was broken or it wasn't. If it was broken, make the ruling. If it wasn't why say anything? This has been debated to death here.

Chuck, Larry,

while I get your point, range commands and safety warnings are by definition not distractions. The competitor must expect to hear them, at the RO's discretion.....

[notasccrmom]

As a somewhat experienced shooter (and an RO myself) , I prefer to not have the RO say anything that is not necessary. I've had "MUZZLE" yelled at me at a major match when I knew that I was no where close to the 180. The gun was actually about 45 degrees from it when it happened, since I had the gun up in front of me doing a reload. It seemed so out of place to me at the time that it really threw me off. I actually paused while staring at the position of the gun and thought to myself "are you serious?"

I agree that it's the RO's judgement to make, but please use it sparingly and preferably only with new, less experienced shooters.

Edited October 1, 2009 by notasccrmom

[ChuckS]

Chuck, Larry,

while I get your point, range commands and safety warnings are by definition not distractions. The competitor must expect to hear them, at the RO's discretion.....

Never said that a range command was a distraction or unwelcome. Proper safety warnings are not a distraction and are most welcome.

Now, if I am moving down a COF and have the choice of stopping and taking 2 shots at a target 70 degrees to my right or taking the first shot at 70 degrees and the second shot at 80* degrees while continuing to move, I will probably choose the latter. I really don't need to hear about it. Yes I could miss it, have a jamb, or trigger freeze, but that is all part of the risk-reward trade study we do when we decide how to shoot a target.

Later,

Chuck

* if 80 degrees is too close, change the rule...

[Nik Habicht]

Chuck, Larry,

while I get your point, range commands and safety warnings are by definition not distractions. The competitor must expect to hear them, at the RO's discretion.....

Never said that a range command was a distraction or unwelcome. Proper safety warnings are not a distraction and are most welcome.

Must have misread your earlier post....

Now, if I am moving down a COF and have the choice of stopping and taking 2 shots at a target 70 degrees to my right or taking the first shot at 70 degrees and the second shot at 80* degrees while continuing to move, I will probably choose the latter. I really don't need to hear about it. Yes I could miss it, have a jamb, or trigger freeze, but that is all part of the risk-reward trade study we do when we decide how to shoot a target.

Later,

Chuck

* if 80 degrees is too close, change the rule...

If you're moving smoothly, clearly focused on your plan, you could be at 89 or 90 degrees without getting a warning.....

Go visibly past 90 and you'll hear something else.....

As an RO I've generally got a pretty good idea where the targets are that will get shot close to the 180 --- and I'm perfectly content to let competitors take every last legal degree they need....

[ChuckS]

If you're moving smoothly, clearly focused on your plan, you could be at 89 or 90 degrees without getting a warning.....

Go visibly past 90 and you'll hear something else.....

Perfect!

Thanks,

Nik